Cintron Response

Within the “Fieldworking Self Excerpt,” the significance of positioning is highlighted in context with ethnographic research. Notably, positioning relates to an ethnographer’s subjectivity in their analysis. An ethnographer’s subjectivity is an important aspect of an ethnography, as it affects how the researcher perceives their surroundings during research. Specifically, “Fieldworking Self Excerpt” underscores three forms of positioning that affect the research process: fixed positioning, subjective positioning, and textual positioning.

These forms of positioning are illustrated in “Angel’s Town,” where Ralph Cintron provides his interpretation of the Latino community of Angelstown. One form of positioning, fixed positioning, corresponds with subjectivity that is inherent and unchanging in the researchers. The other forms of positioning, subjective and textual positioning, relate with the researcher’s subjective experiences and the way the researcher expresses their analysis through words. An example of positioning is demonstrated through Cintron’s race and gender. These characteristics are representative of fixed positioning, as they are innate, biological traits. It is as a result of Cintron’s race and gender that his analysis is subjectively influenced throughout his research.

Likewise, Cintron subjectively positions his analysis in “Angel’s Town” by coming to conclusions about his observations. This is seen through Cintron’s interpretation of Latino society, which “reveal[ed] with unusual clarity the urgent need to camoflague with large public displays all those traces of raggedness and decay that lurked in [their] private spaces” (118). Cintron perceives the Latino society as attempting to cover up their own raggedness because he does not consider himself to be ragged. It is because the Latino community is different than Cintron that he is able to uncover the cultural differences between himself and Latino society. Through the incorporation of his own subjectivity, his ethnography becomes personalized, so that Cintron’s research encompasses only the Latino community he researched, in contrast with Latinos as a whole.

Question: Does Cintron include enough subjectivity in his research? How could he have made his analysis more subjective?